From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id sJUuDr1/MmHzPwAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 22:04:13 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id ELODCb1/MmEZQAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 20:04:13 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3CAB91D3 for ; Fri, 3 Sep 2021 22:04:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:42818 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mMFQ3-0007ZG-TD for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 16:04:11 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47590) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mMFPq-0007X9-2p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 16:03:59 -0400 Received: from h87-96-130-155.cust.a3fiber.se ([87.96.130.155]:35016 helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mMFPo-0003gy-47 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 16:03:57 -0400 From: Xinglu Chen DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yoctocell.xyz; s=mail; t=1630699431; bh=AZsRJPO7qq0Hu402bgOkpFscQjKZeKK82fi4fWSzs+s=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=CrLleJhgp+JysxDLpewq//a6jzFfFN4zmusE/4GbHglFvmGngYkCxXMNlRQ+NIrQc 3GmPIQk7W6vrhH4mHnmVZLZ9HGD799ocFJDYQnN1SPDSk+y9jGGQHD/WlwfCBgvwKt 8sg3X9BprSkF/7gaacaY8kpdvUszdBdvVbcMc57U= To: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages? In-Reply-To: References: <8635qp1j6k.fsf@mgsn.dev> <87bl5clg3p.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> <2def863d-fd2e-46c3-9a4c-9c6772724d27@www.fastmail.com> <87fsuojl43.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> <87o899iqpp.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2021 22:03:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87ilzhifz0.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=87.96.130.155; envelope-from=public@yoctocell.xyz; helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz X-Spam_score_int: 14 X-Spam_score: 1.4 X-Spam_bar: + X-Spam_report: (1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=0.5, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.999, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Christopher Baines via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." , Sarah Morgensen Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1630699453; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=wAvYPhen8aC9svuY6ksWOqm4eHNYq9CGMivDkRaheNM=; b=oikznLsOAb5pSARZUBU9ObM956Ek+smA6DQfxstZG3x69qC1eC4cDQj84bm8DZ6rp5aPjb S5mNZTSFfh7aUn1ajyjIbXgt4b4RaByXa6aexKo1bdODEQAcwi4FJKBVLR/MsPhBdCMw0y mwZvJEcF59zAZMxeoycRDtXBxbp2l4AKTWkb7ys2gk7N+Y5oLfuoM93W/Lz3P3H3Q/TTqr Tt0VOs9FuLc2pXDrobL2WhrDcjRQd1lniHkvm7SMdG/2ImEJmURgjfezr5XK7mULA7KUcb QV2hnEHse2qz2iLTJYeoz+oxx5IJjzlDK5O1QybT4RrRwbZafeeMQa40wjH1yg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1630699453; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=XxwM5LL0ULGM/L2z2Cpo+a7z0kkIAG/cbUDE/thPbZRk/L8Vd69Z8NNGQ1oa+kxd8vO3+0 zI29cgx9BUFvWeG/YgOoXY0alb39Q2IxjkOmVksaAs5XB7PDfVTzUqkCmkKWOHwIth4hpP HxGnN2OkD4RbvtZ0ZW696VBVufY2n9KUmz6BiTo1Gwl68WL/+xLHjuxNDbVU9LAjyXdWF1 4Yq2bWzEu4xJ6cOLz11/38al6BHQzIE6i5CNRY4FH+UROYLFVfbg0safaht3Dg/qwlICht 9XppXJXqjTCmwbka3m09uvuZv4JRDtdCcw1ekZeRM4YjuocQZdyNuii/TgtkVg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=yoctocell.xyz header.s=mail header.b=CrLleJhg; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=yoctocell.xyz; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.22 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=yoctocell.xyz header.s=mail header.b=CrLleJhg; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=yoctocell.xyz; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: E3CAB91D3 X-Spam-Score: -4.22 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: xzbc7pwRXIQA --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 03 2021, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 06:11:46PM +0200, Xinglu Chen wrote: >> The date does give an idea of how old the version is, compare that to a >> random string of 7 characters. If a user wants to know the exact >> commit, they can always just run =E2=80=98guix edit PACKAGE=E2=80=99 and= check the >> =E2=80=98commit=E2=80=99 field in the source of the package. > > That's true. > > However, it's not easy to figure out which revision of guix.git produced > a package that is installed in a profile. =E2=80=98guix describe=E2=80=99 would show the commit of the guix.git repo = used, wouldn=E2=80=99t it? > The transformation from package definition to built package is lossy. > You cannot take a built package and ask Guix "which guix.git commit was > used for this?" > > So, if I have a package foo-0.0.0-1-2021-12-31 in my profile, it's > impossible to reliably trace that back to the correct Guix package > definition and then discover what upstream source code it was built > with. [0] On the other hand, if the package's version includes the Git > commit, it's trivial. Good point, I don=E2=80=99t really have a good solution to that. > So, I think we each have different needs that we want satisfied: > > 1) To know how old the package's source code is > 2) To know what source code a built package is based on > > The second item is something I do often, and I think a lot of Guix > developers do it too. And in general, it's imporant for store paths to > include meaningful "version" information; a date is not meaningful in > this sense. So let's be careful not to lose that ability by removing > commit IDs from the package versions. > > We can satisfy both of these by adding the date to the version string, > although we should be careful not to risk exceeding Linux's shebang > length limit (127), which sometimes will crop up if packages provide > shebang-able interpreters. The store path needs to be short enough that > the "bin/foo" part does not make the absolute path exceed 127 > characters. This is something that was addressed while designing the > current versioning for VCS snapshots. I didn=E2=80=99t know Linux had this weird(?) restriction, but yeah, it wil= l be something to think about. > I'm still skeptical of the utility of adding a date, given the lack of > useful time information conveyed by Git, but if people really want it > and it can be made to work, then we should go ahead. If the date is not part of the version string, I think that there should at least be a comment saying the the date of the commit, just to let other people quickly see how old the version is. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJJBAEBCAAzFiEEAVhh4yyK5+SEykIzrPUJmaL7XHkFAmEyf6MVHHB1YmxpY0B5 b2N0b2NlbGwueHl6AAoJEKz1CZmi+1x5IO4QAITD7d0ccEw/gDDmVxFUXXxR1T5A 9GqtfelzzK80dL97Ct0M/8B7DSQSquj4GC4llS7QFjG0tf+1/az1cEOCyqPp0OLK jSADKs6BHUtMjjk26WpFVO/vhBxHkiTUQzT+mOCXgLtcJ55xo9oWukoq/1xc415A YiY36VohkWbSuzjkG4wALz1WjPX6mJLFXhDKiULxUS5zc7+s2GxNWE3AmemlNItg SrsjSSy0GCKWOMElwTge8pvgu3z+0sF14KnAMqxAcdQUZAkvsxE9vaHzMqzjcabb w1fo1a/DdFr5pMITZyixwt2KCfSt0tlrY0l/68FXkqUckPzf51bC1J6sa4773fM8 E8wqfeqBH87MT0vIojeeDFLEy51KBnivKQQ5+oS0ASMfR23+hRzPxKKxdcQ1/aux 0g9jvpytfd4kPR7wnv+lDLrW3ZGATzdXOmc9YdQ6Q3NVOQE9PY3PlRut9A1aJ5wk D/5RJuGgmV/s72q7PLjQJ93TRxi6fnUbd/aIdoHmlpv+i/CI52xiTGl1Jgr8PTjZ of+g1EKnPrvanDbciIK9gXOGyXuEsWLMbrBnoBch8QQQBmWQDOuGygOuw/1oJOv2 vkIUIzoza9WcAlvdS/Bm7axwoAqdZdGTMeCbE1PDFuOzyAFdlYMGXdl44x+8y+Eg qayBiVOVScFXt4Fu =nsfC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--